Women are supposed to submit to men(?) such as these?

[12strings]

I think I need to back up a little, pause and ask a question.
These are the key verses used to support Women Submitting or being subject to their husbands.

Eph 5:22
Eph 5:23
Eph. 5:24 (in everything)
Colossians 3:18
Titus2:5
I Peter 3:1
1Peter 3:5

As I was reading these verses it occurred to me that NO reasons or circumstances are even implied that would give any wife any reason or right to leave her husband. Am I missing something here? If I were to decide that women are subject to their husbands would that mean I would have to say that there is nothing in Scripture giving a wife a reason to leave her husband even for a temporary separation? Would that be the most consistent and honest reading?

I think you are reading these passages with the honesty that at the very least demands that we not be quick to dismiss submission, or staying married, too quickly.

This is why I think we must be careful about advising against submission, or advising divorce. Paul's teaching, at surface level seems to be for a wife to seek to win her husband by her Christ-like demeanor, even in difficult situations.

It does seem that Jesus gives an exception for adultery, and Paul in Cor. gives an exception for abandonment. (Ie, if you husband leaves you, you are no longer bound to him...)

But some take this and say if a husband is emotionally disconnected then he has "abandoned" his wife spiritually...I don't really think that's what Paul is talking about.

Paul's greatest

 

[fortytworc]

I think you are reading these passages with the honesty that at the very least demands that we not be quick to dismiss submission, or staying married, too quickly.

This is why I think we must be careful about advising against submission, or advising divorce. Paul's teaching, at surface level seems to be for a wife to seek to win her husband by her Christ-like demeanor, even in difficult situations.

It does seem that Jesus gives an exception for adultery, and Paul in Cor. gives an exception for abandonment. (Ie, if you husband leaves you, you are no longer bound to him...)

But some take this and say if a husband is emotionally disconnected then he has "abandoned" his wife spiritually...I don't really think that's what Paul is talking about.

Paul's greatest

Thank you. It may take me awhile to sort some of this out. Initially, on the surface some questions are raised: What is meant by the word submit(submission) itself? Both then and now. If it is at the least agreed that adultery and abandonment are Biblical grounds for not submitting how are these defined? When do either of these things apply? Matt.5:27,28,32; Matt.19:9...Does viewing pornography say someone can be counseled to leave? The page seems empty as to the issue of abandonment. And is any other type of (what we call) abuse definitely not reason for the abused one to leave and maybe divorce? How much, or for how long, or to what intensity...? These are not flippant questions. I don't especially expect anyone to have a certain, locked tight, here is the Scripture to settle this answer.
At this time I am still at, "If the complimentarian view (or something similar) is correct that means there are no reasons given in the context of those scriptures for not submitting, ever." The culturally based arguments against Male headship and female submission aren't valid because the other is so plain and matter of fact.(That's a hard one to swallow. I have been taught to always look at the text, context, customs, historical setting,etc.)
It seems I have some work ahead. Any help is welcome. Please don't take my questions as rejections. (After centuries of debate, argument, fighting, and splitting, who in the world do I think I am to even entertain thinking I will settle this issue just for myself let alone anyone else?)

 

[DiamondLady]

You are right, abuse is not supposed to be a part of the equation of marriage, but the unfortunate reality is that there is sin in this world and abuse does happen. No it's not right, that's why it's called sin. but the Bible takes into account the sin aspect in a marriage and that is why there are grounds for divorce (Mat 19:10)... fornication. Abuse happens, yes, but it never should happen. It's people who have a warped sense of what being a submissive wife looks like that helps it continue in the world today. Being an equal partner who will not accept that behavior from their spouse would stop a lot of it, but when a spouse becomes a doormat or punching bag, whether emotional or physical....and silently accepts it....then they're tacitly giving the abuser permission to continue.

If you deem a husband who is being an absolute jerk/overly demanding and ordering his wife about as abusive... then yes, I feel she should submit to it. If it is physical abuse, then I believe she has a right for seperation until it is safe for her to return. One potentially endangers her life, the other does not.
No, she absolutely should not submit to her husband being a demanding jerk. She should lovingly point out to him his sin of mistreatment to her after asking God to give her the wisdom and words to speak. There is never any excuse for mistreatment of our spouse in any manner or form. If your husband is being a demanding jerk then it's up to you to help him see the error of his ways.
And you're right, a husband who is abusive is not loving his wife as Christ loved the church, but he'll have to answer to God for that. Just as I feel we as women will have to answer for whether we were submissive to our husbands our not.



Perhaps I have mistaken your meaning, and I apologize if that is the case... but so what if the answer to everyone of those is a big fat NO. You still have to submit to your husband. As it has been pointed out before, a wife submitting to her husband is not contingient upon her husband treating her in a Christ-like manner and vice-versa. If a husband is NOT treating his wife in this manner HE is sinning and is not fulfilling HIS Biblical role. Again, here you are misuing the idea of submission. It's not a physical action, it's a heart action. I can disagree with my husband all day long and still have a submissive attitude. I can be on opposite sides of an issue with him and still have a submissive heart. It's not about "following his orders", never was and that's never what Paul meant when he wrote that passage of scripture.



In a perfect world, the husband would ask his wife for godly advice and councel before making any serious decisions. Since it is not a perfect world, he does not always do things the right way. When he does - we women must be sure to vocally praise him for seeking our input (whether he follows it or not). When he does not - provided the decree issued does not go against God's law, we need to obey our husbands (whether we like it our not). And yes, sometimes this means bowing our heads and following him around like a baby duck after its mama. Wrong. It means calling his attention to his pitiful treatment of you. My husband does not need my "vocal praise" when he asks my opinion. He asks my opinion because he loves and respects me, and because he knows that the few times he hasn't asked me things have usually turned out to be white elephants/disasters. (you should ask him sometime about the white pick-up truck incident) My husband respects my thoughts and opinions. We balance one another out. A marriage is to be a partnership always, never one person doing the leading and one following...we're to walk side by side, arm in arm, a team to battle the foes of evil against marriage and the family. Think of it like this...when you see a SWAT team you'll notice they walk shoulder to shoulder, shields up in front...a TEAM. That's how marriage should be.

While we are all equal as children of God, and will recieve an equal inheritance. We are not given equal authority or responsibility - and we must remember that. 1Ti 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. How many wives have this hanging over their head? I'm sorry, where do you read in scripture that we do not have equal responsibility? Yes, the husband is to be the head of the home...the spiritual leader...never does it say anything about making day to day decisions. YOU are as equally responsibile as he is. Don't be brainwashed by fundamental teachings that you are a lesser partner in your marriage. You are not.



Once again you are right. Wives should be loved and cherished, pampered and cared for... just as husbands should be. The greatest way to get your husband to treat you with respect, is to treat him with respect. The greatest way to get your husband to love and cherish you, is to love and cherish him. Now I'm not advocating that a woman who does not do these things for her husband is asking to be abused. Not at all. Just as I am not saying that a husband has any right to abuse his wife, whether she treats him/submits to him as she should. Treating someone in a specific manner and submitting to him are two different things and they should never be confused. I'm merely saying that sometimes as women we make the husbands job to love and care for us harder than it should be when we do not treat him as God would have us - whether he deserves it or not. This should not be an issue in how our husbands treat us. I am a perfect example of this. There are days I am quite unlovely. I suffer from fibromyalgia and live with near constant pain. There are days the pain gets to me and I become very grouchy and irritable...and my husband says I can be "mean." He loves me more through that because he knows I don't mean to be so grouchy and will often ask if I've taken my meds....I tend to forget...or if I need to get in the jacuzzi...he loves me THROUGH it. His love and care for me is never dependent on my behavior and attitudes. Thank the Lord. Remember, God never commanded us to love our husbands, He already knew that would be a natural thing for us. On the other hand men were commanded to love their wives Eph 5:25 because, honestly, who's natural tendency is it to love in a Christ-like manner?

As for how we could possibly mistreat our spouse... easily done when we begin mistreating God. When our relationship with God breaks down, all other relationships are likely to begin breaking down as well. I agree, it's a horrible thing. God wasn't just making stuff up when He said that two shall become one flesh, and hurting half of yourself eventually takes it toll. For some, sooner rather than later.

I hope I've responded where you can read...I did it conversationally and in red. My only goal is in helping women see that being submissive does not equate with being a doormat, to never having an opinion or having a say, or allowing a man to set your path in life and you having to follow it. That simply is not what God meant when he instructed Paul to pen this passage of scripture.

 

[AresMan]

Complementarian men symbolically urinate on women

http://www.examiner.com/article/complementarian-men-symbolically-urinate-on-women

They go back home and demand submission. Where is 'as Christ loved His church and GAVE Himself for her?' Not representative of the whole? Read elsewhere on the net and the anger at even questioning 'Biblical Manhood' practically grabs you by the throat. Better that we let women teach than sit under this type of 'scriptural' order.

The passages about wives submitting to their husbands are coupled with commands to men to love their wives as Christ loved the Church. This does not just mean that he his willing to take a bullet for her, but that every day He should be willing to give himself for her well-being. The two go together. If one spouse does not follow his or her part, the other one does not have an obligation to follow the other side. Discernment is key in a difficult situation for resolution.

Any "commands" that a husband gives a wife should be done out of pure love for her well-being. I would say most "commands" should be in the form of polite requests with the implication that the husband is perfectly willing to do the task himself if his wife cannot complete the request. She is not a slave or doormat. The husband is to treat his wife like a "weaker vessel":

1Pe 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

The "weaker vessel" here carries an idea similar to Paul's analogy in Romans 9 about "vessels for honorable use" and "vessels for common use."
The husband is like a "vessel for common use": a strong holding container made of iron or thick clay that can take a beating. It has many uses primarily geared toward work and is intended to get dirty and dented.
The wife is like a "vessel for honorable use": a weak vase of great value intended to be displayed on a shelf for wonder and awe. It is rare and priceless, but can also break easily.

The husband should treat his wife with honor, being careful not to break her. If the husband is careless and treats the wife as a "vessel for common use," he risks breaking her and destroying a priceless treasure.

 

[12strings]

At this time I am still at, "If the complimentarian view (or something similar) is correct that means there are no reasons given in the context of those scriptures for not submitting, ever."

1. I think I would agree, as long as one took the larger NT context and said, a wife could, in a submissive spirit, tell her husband that if he wants to have a mistress, she will not be staying around.

2. Let's say that the complimentarian view is wrong. That raises a few questions for me:
-why did paul argue headship based on created order?
-Why did paul not teach both man and wife the exact same things in Eph. 5, instead of sacrificial love for the man and respect and submission for the wife?
-Finally, Does an egalitarian view really give MORE leeway for divorce? Wouldn't an egalitarian have to look at the NT and say, Even if the man is a jerk, if he's not cheating, and he still wants to be married to you, you need to stay there? I don't see how negating the submission part leads to freedom for divorce?

The culturally based arguments against Male headship and female submission aren't valid because the other is so plain and matter of fact.(That's a hard one to swallow. I have been taught to always look at the text, context, customs, historical setting,etc.)

-I doubt any complimentarian would say NOT to look at context and historical setting, they just interpet them differently. For example, most "comps" don't require head coverings...they see that as a cultural expression of the more fundamental submission issue. (I can go deeper into that if you want).

It seems I have some work ahead. Any help is welcome. Please don't take my questions as rejections. (After centuries of debate, argument, fighting, and splitting, who in the world do I think I am to even entertain thinking I will settle this issue just for myself let alone anyone else?)

I really would recommend John Piper's 3 sermons linked here: 2 on the man's responsibility, and one on the woman. I think you would find much that you could agree with.

-http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/lionhearted-and-lamblike-the-christian-husband-as-head-part-1

-http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/lionhearted-and-lamblike-the-christian-husband-as-head-part-2

-http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/the-beautiful-faith-of-fearless-submission


Also, if you really want an "outside-the-box" view on Divorce and remarraige...listen to his last 2 sermons in that same marraige series...PIPER believes there is NO biblical grounds for divorce, not even adultery. I disagree with him here, as do the elders in his own church... But it's interesting to hear his reasoning none-the-less.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

If one spouse does not follow his or her part, the other one does not have an obligation to follow the other side.

If the sin or wrongdoing of one person ever justifies another to fail to do that which is right then apparently this is the only case..... marriage. This is simply NOT at ALL true. How would you justify this in light of Paul's commands to the wife of an un-believing husband? Obviously, he is in no way (inasmuch as he is not even saved) "doing his part". Did Paul instruct the wife to act in any way she feels? Thankfully, as for me and my house...we will answer for our own actions without appealling to the excuse that someone else was wrong too.

1Pe 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

The "weaker vessel" here carries an idea similar to Paul's analogy in Romans 9 about "vessels for honorable use" and "vessels for common use."
The husband is like a "vessel for common use": a strong holding container made of iron or thick clay that can take a beating. It has many uses primarily geared toward work and is intended to get dirty and dented.
The wife is like a "vessel for honorable use": a weak vase of great value intended to be displayed on a shelf for wonder and awe. It is rare and priceless, but can also break easily.

This sounds too conveniently lumped together, you well know that Rom 9: Written by Paul, To the Romans, is about election to cross-reference something by Peter in a general epistle...to all Christians....on the subject of marriage. I am sorry nothing doing....And I quote your BRILLIANT book: "Context is King"

The husband should treat his wife with honor, being careful not to break her. If the husband is careless and treats the wife as a "vessel for common use," he risks breaking her and destroying a priceless treasure.

Provided she is a Proverbs 31 woman yes...Pro 31:10 ¶ Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price [is] far above rubies.

Provided she despises the God-honoring doctrines of submission...no...: Pro 21:9 [It is] better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide house.


Out of sheer curiosity: How does one have a democracy in a counsel of two?? I mean, mathematically speaking....

The BEST teaching my wife and I have ever received on these topics is from Elizabeth George... In her book: A Woman After God's Own Heart

 

[LillyoftheValley]

Thank you. It may take me awhile to sort some of this out. Initially, on the surface some questions are raised: What is meant by the word submit(submission) itself? Both then and now. If it is at the least agreed that adultery and abandonment are Biblical grounds for not submitting how are these defined? When do either of these things apply? Matt.5:27,28,32; Matt.19:9...Does viewing pornography say someone can be counseled to leave? The page seems empty as to the issue of abandonment. And is any other type of (what we call) abuse definitely not reason for the abused one to leave and maybe divorce? How much, or for how long, or to what intensity...? These are not flippant questions. I don't especially expect anyone to have a certain, locked tight, here is the Scripture to settle this answer.
At this time I am still at, "If the complimentarian view (or something similar) is correct that means there are no reasons given in the context of those scriptures for not submitting, ever." The culturally based arguments against Male headship and female submission aren't valid because the other is so plain and matter of fact.(That's a hard one to swallow. I have been taught to always look at the text, context, customs, historical setting,etc.)
It seems I have some work ahead. Any help is welcome. Please don't take my questions as rejections. (After centuries of debate, argument, fighting, and splitting, who in the world do I think I am to even entertain thinking I will settle this issue just for myself let alone anyone else?)

When it comes to marital seperation, I found this site that (as far as I am concerned) seems to answer just about any questions you might have.

http://cafebiblia.com/?p=98

 

[Yeshua1]

Oh, and by the way Annsni...


:thumbs::thumbs::applause:

yes, the wife is to be submissive to her husband, as that fulfills scripture, BUT, cannot be taken in absolute sense though, as if she submits to what violates sinning and disobedient to god...

In those specific cases, believe higher submission is to her husband Jesus, not her earthly one!

 

[LillyoftheValley]

Origionally posted by DiamondLady
Abuse happens, yes, but it never should happen. It's people who have a warped sense of what being a submissive wife looks like that helps it continue in the world today. Being an equal partner who will not accept that behavior from their spouse would stop a lot of it, but when a spouse becomes a doormat or punching bag, whether emotional or physical....and silently accepts it....then they're tacitly giving the abuser permission to continue.

I agree that abuse should never happen, there is no justification for it. A woman who is being physically abused should immediately leave, seek help from her church and call the police. Standing there and silently "taking it" is also wrong.

No, she absolutely should not submit to her husband being a demanding jerk. She should lovingly point out to him his sin of mistreatment to her after asking God to give her the wisdom and words to speak. There is never any excuse for mistreatment of our spouse in any manner or form. If your husband is being a demanding jerk then it's up to you to help him see the error of his ways.

Once again, mistreating your spouse is decidedly wrong, I don't think anyone on BB would ever say otherwise. Where we no longer see eye to eye is our response. A husband being a jerk and demanding is mistreating you, but not abusing you. He is abusing his authority over you. I believe that women (because we're just that dual cool) can do both. First we lovingly point out the error of his ways, and then we submit to his authority. For example: My husband and I did not always agree on our Republican Nominee. We had civil discussions, and lovingly disagreed. But had he pulled rank and told me to vote for the person he wanted, I would have done it. I might not have liked it, but I would obey.

Again, here you are misuing the idea of submission. It's not a physical action, it's a heart action. I can disagree with my husband all day long and still have a submissive attitude. I can be on opposite sides of an issue with him and still have a submissive heart. It's not about "following his orders", never was and that's never what Paul meant when he wrote that passage of scripture.

I would contend that submission is physical as well as heart,
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5293&t=KJV
If I am to submit to my husband, as a soldier is to submit to a military general... I feel confident in saying that physical action is absolutely a part of it. If you use it in the non-military sense - action is still a part of it. How else can you voluntarily give in or cooperate?
As for the heart... Eph 5:22 uses the same word for submit as Col 3:18, only it goes a little further in telling us as unto the Lord God wants us to follow him not only in actions but in heart as well. We all know what it feels like to receive an insincere apology. All talk (action) but no heart, and who really wants that?

Wrong. It means calling his attention to his pitiful treatment of you. My husband does not need my "vocal praise" when he asks my opinion. He asks my opinion because he loves and respects me, and because he knows that the few times he hasn't asked me things have usually turned out to be white elephants/disasters. (you should ask him sometime about the white pick-up truck incident) My husband respects my thoughts and opinions. We balance one another out. A marriage is to be a partnership always, never one person doing the leading and one following...we're to walk side by side, arm in arm, a team to battle the foes of evil against marriage and the family. Think of it like this...when you see a SWAT team you'll notice they walk shoulder to shoulder, shields up in front...a TEAM. That's how marriage should be.

As his sister in Christ I should help him to see the error of his ways, then as his wife obey. Yes I can give him my opinion and input, but once all of that is said and done... My job is to show him where he errors, the Holy Spirit is left the job of convicting him. I agree that a husband who seeks out his wife's opinion does so out of love and respect. My husband has asked me for my opinion on numerous occassions (big and small) and I love it when he does. I fix his favorite meals out of love, sometimes I put on makeup for him before he comes home (9am). When I do these things I love to hear him thank/praise me for doing them. It encourages me to continue. Just as praising our husbands when they do something we enjoy encourages them to continue also.
Oh, and as for your SWAT analogy... They do have SWAT leaders
http://ntoa.org/site/swat-management/swat-team-leader-development-5-days.html
And in most instances (riot control being an exception) they go in single file, minimizing the amount of men left as open targets. The man in front or the "point man" is responsible for entering unknown rooms first. I know it was just an example, but I personally found it to not be a very good one. I did however get your point.

I'm sorry, where do you read in scripture that we do not have equal responsibility? Yes, the husband is to be the head of the home...the spiritual leader...never does it say anything about making day to day decisions. YOU are as equally responsibile as he is. Don't be brainwashed by fundamental teachings that you are a lesser partner in your marriage. You are not.

Husbands and Wives have responsibilities, but they are not the same ones. Our very reason for exsistence shows this.
Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
We are responsible for helping our husbands

1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God.
A husband is responsible for taking headship in his marriage. Which means that one day he will have to give an account for how he lead.

1Ti 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. The head of the household (the husband) is responsible for providing for his family.

Treating someone in a specific manner and submitting to him are two different things and they should never be confused.

When it comes to husbands and wives I believe they are one and the same as I have pointed out in sections above.

This should not be an issue in how our husbands treat us. I am a perfect example of this. There are days I am quite unlovely. I suffer from fibromyalgia and live with near constant pain. There are days the pain gets to me and I become very grouchy and irritable...and my husband says I can be "mean." He loves me more through that because he knows I don't mean to be so grouchy and will often ask if I've taken my meds....I tend to forget...or if I need to get in the jacuzzi...he loves me THROUGH it. His love and care for me is never dependent on my behavior and attitudes. Thank the Lord.

I am not excusing a husband mistreating his wife. What I am saying is that we can help make their lives easier (the whole help meet thing). Compare it to.... Women can help (not completely remove) mens lustful thoughts by not running around in skimpy clothing
I too am only trying to show what a submissive woman looks like. If only we agreed whole-heartedly... we'd be force to reckon with.